Fimbank Plc vs Rajeev Suresh Bhatia
2024 Latest Caselaw 24764 Bom

Bombay High Court

Fimbank Plc vs Rajeev Suresh Bhatia on 26 August, 2024

Author: Abhay Ahuja

Bench: Abhay Ahuja

                                       908. IAL 23780-24 in COMEXL 23336-24.doc


                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

            INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 23780 OF 2024
                              IN
      COMMERCIAL EXECUTION APPLICATION (L) NO. 23336 OF 2024

 Fimbank PLC                                                          ...Applicant
       V/s.
 Rajeev Suresh Bhatia                                                 ...Respondent

 Mr. Ranjeev Carvalho with Mr. Rupesh Geete Mr. Sidhant Kapoor, Mr.
 Shriraj Menon, Mr. Sumeet Lall, Mr. Aavesh Ganja and Ms. Priya
 Gangat, for the Applicant.
 Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar with Ms. Nidhi Singh and Mr. Brian Noronha
 i/b India Law LLP for Respondent.

                           CORAM   :        ABHAY AHUJA, J.

                           DATE    :        26th AUGUST, 2024
 P.C. :

1. This Execution Application as well as Interim Application seek

execution of foreign award against the Respondent-Judgment Debtor.

2. When the matter is called out, Mr. Khandeparkar, learned

Counsel appearing for the Respondent raises a preliminary issue with

respect to the joint vakalatnama that has been signed in favour of two

law firms. Mr. Khandeparkar, points out that the Power of Attorney

granted to Mr. Johny Joseph by the Applicant appoints CSL Chambers,

a Delhi based law firm and not Satyaki Law Firm and that unless the

said defect is cured, the law firm cannot represent the Applicant-Decree

Holder.

908. IAL 23780-24 in COMEXL 23336-24.doc

3. Mr. Khandeparkar, also points out that there is no certificate

under Section 44A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 as is mandated

under the said Code for execution of a foreign award and that he has

instructions to raise this issue and other issues on merits and seeks

some time to file reply in the matter.

4. Mr. Carvalho, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant seeks

some time to cure the defect with respect to the joint vakalatnama and

submits that as far as the issue relating to the Section 44A certificate is

concerned, in view of the Penal Notice at Exhibit A, the same would not

be necessary.

5. Be that as it may, let the reply be filed on behalf of the

Respondent-Judgment Debtor by 23rd September, 2024 with copy to the

other side. Rejoinder by 30th September, 2024 with copy to the other

side. List on 7th October, 2024.

6. In the meanwhile, the Applicant is permitted to cure the defect

with respect to the joint vakalatnama. Let the necessary amendments to

cure the defect with respect to the vakalatnama be effected by the next

date and copy of the amended applications be served upon the other

side.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)